Fighter/Bomber vs Tanker/Cargo Track

[bruno]

Bullet: excellent post. I am certain that both you and OldGrad are mostly in agreement and where you are not is a matter of opinion on a subject where there are no absolute answers.
So my request to all posters would be to get this thread back on track and talk about the different aspects of being a pilot of these different types of airframes. Surely the OP was asking more about things that would include:the relative degree of difficulty in getting selected for a type; the differing career prospects between types, the amount of travel, PCS moves, opportunity for command and flying time etc... all of which are questions that those of you can asnwer based on your experiences?

[13ryan13]

Originally Posted by Christcorp

Ryan; keep in mind, that "Some" aircraft are a progression. Not sure if it is still the case, but I believe that the few F-22 pilots came from the existing F-15 pool. (Yo Bullet, help me out bud, you retired after me). Same with the F-35. Initially, it will probably come from the F-16 pool. (Depending on the model). As time goes on, this progression will change. So, by the time you've graduated from the academy and gotten through the point of UPT to start choosing, you might be able to go straight to a 22 or 35. But, worst case on the best case (Sort of like "Military Intelligence"); I would say to link your choices into categories first, then aircraft second. And because you went to a combination of Fighters, Bombers, and transport; you've sort of made it very difficult. You have picked obviously the best of all 3 categories. I would simply add a 2nd aircraft to each category and then wait till you get closer to finishing the academy and getting a UPT slot before worrying which one.

But like I said; for the F-22, add the F-15. For the F-35, add the F-16. For the C-17, add the C-5. And for the B-2, add the B1. Do your best at the academy; get your UPT slot; and graduate in the top 10% of UPT and pick what you want. best of luck to you. mike.....

Originally Posted by Bullet

Ryan, IMO the primary reason you would want to select a particular platform would be because you feel you would most enjoy the MISSION that particular airframe does. Want to focus on air-to-air dominace? Then your best bet would be an F-22 or an F-15C. Want to go for a strike mission (attacking enemy targets on the ground, either in a tactical role against fixed targets, or in a Close Air Support role against enemy troops)? Then the F-16, A-10, F-15E or F-35 would be good choices. Want to go on LONG RANGE strike missions, deep into enemy territory? Look at the B-2, B-1, or B-52. Want to airdrop paratroops or heavy equipment, or provide invaluable strategic lift capability to the combat forces? Then C-130s or C-17s are the planes of choice.

You can easily see that ALL of these platforms have a key role in the AF and the defense of America. And there are so many more platforms in other roles that we haven't even scratched.

I hope you have the opportunity when it comes time to pin on your wings that you will be in that enviable position to select from among all your choices. I think your timing may be a little early for the F-35, which doesn't become operational in the AF until 2013, and most likely will have experienced pilots transfer from other platforms like the F-16, A-10 and F-15E for the first few years as their "initial cadre". Perhaps they'll open the pipeline to brand new pilots fresh out of UPT several years later as the experienced guys get to learn the new system and develop the tactics required to succeed in its primary role. In the F-22's case, they just started opening up slots for brand new Lts fresh out of UPT, so you may get a shot there (and CC was correct, most of the first pilots were transfers from the F-15C because of their background with air-to-air as the primary mission).

You can always start with one of the legacy fighters and transfer over after a tour or two. It happened to me.

Weeding through the posts and discovering these two thoughtful replies to my question, I realized that I shouldn't choose the airplane, I should choose the mission types? I have come to terms with the fact that the F-35 is out of my immediate reach, and have it pretty well narrowed down to the F-22 (or F-15, which is still a great choice), the B-2 (or B-1), and the C-17 (or C-5). Which translates according to Christcorp and Bullet into deciding between maintaining air superiority - which would be a very honorable position to hold in the greatest Air Force in the world, bringing in the bombs and having the privalege of flying some pretty big, cool, and expensive planes, or delivering cargo and seeing the entire world as well as logging many hours in a jet. I guess that part, the decision between the nature of the missions, is going to be the hardest to decide from. But cargo is quickly fading from my list....... (too slow and no action)

But needless to say, thanks Christcorp and Bullet for continuing to give well thought advice to a mere high-schooler like myself.

[Christcorp]

Ryan; you've applied to the Air Force Academy. There is NOTHING MERE about you. Best of luck. Aim High. later... mike.....

[Bullet]

Bruno, thanks for some great suggestions towards getting this thread back on track. Allow me to spend a few paragraphs discussing your topics. Granted, this will be biased towards my experiences in the fighter communities; I ask for others on here with different perspectives and backgrounds to provide a sanity check and expound on areas I miss...

1) The MISSION. Again, IMO the number #1 reason any future flyer should be considering as they make their "dream sheets". For the fighter community, it can be summed-up in some simple words, hammered into me at the beginning of my career by some of the older folks in my first squadron: "we kill people and break things." The new saying popular in the Pentagon and in the HQs around the world is: "war-heads on fore-heads." Pretty blunt, pretty dramatic in their tone, but that is the true reason the US taxpayer spends all those big dollars to put the world's best air force in the air.

When the balloon goes up, you will be called upon to face the enemy, go right into his homeland, and rain death and destruction on his doorstep, all in the name of US policy. This is what you train for, to succeed in that mission. The enemy usually won't just sit back and let you do that to them; that's where the dangerous aspect of our job comes from. Your missions back home will be focused on learning and practicing how to do this better, how to survive the threats, and how to get that target struck. The air-to-air guys focus on how to make sure the strike guys can get through the enemies' own air-to-air screens and to their targets, or how to protect our OWN assets from meeting the same fates as our strike guys are trying to do to the enemy.

Now, the TACTICAL application of airpower is not the domain of our fighters alone. There are LOTS of heavy bombers and gunships (like the AC-130) that also participate in allowing our enemies to die for thier country / fanatical leaders. They typically have similar missions, but longer durations. We also have STRATEGIC assets like the B-2, who are in existence for the even worse scenarios.

Plus, there are quite a few other platforms out there that provide critical support to the mission, such as tankers, Command and Control birds, Combat Search and Rescue platforms, and Recconassaince birds (which have been gaining huge support recently due to the fantastic roles they have played in our current wars). Will they be "downtown" like our stike fighters and bombers? Most likely not. But can our fighters and bombers get there without them? Again, most likely not.

As to our airlift community, they also have a vital mission; the strategic and tactical lift of material and personnel throughout the word and particular theaters. Delivering the beans and bullets required to keep America's forces able to fight. Not as glamorous as the guys who get their gun camera footage on CNN, but just as important. However, they also perform TACTICAL delivery of forces, such as para-drops of troops and supplies in theater. As a guy who once served with the 82nd Airborne, I can tell you it is an AWESOME sight to see literally DOZENS of C-130s and C-17s flying overhead, parachutes popping into the air behind them.


The HOMEFRONT:

One of the bigger differences in the two communities outside of the mission. Fighters and tactical aircraft spend most of their time TRAINING for thier jobs (I mean, we are not engaging the enemy everyday, and blowing things up all over the country would just simply send the wrong message to the American public ). So, most of your flying time is in training, practicing the tactics and procedures you would need in combat. In fact, when I first got in, America hadn't been in heavy combat in over a decade, and wouldn't be in one again for another 5 years. I knew lots of guys with hundreds if not thousands of hours in an airframe, and not one hour of combat time. It's like the kid who goes to basketball practice everyday, takes thousands of free throws after practice, but his team never gets to play against anyone.

Of course, in today's air force, things are a little different. With two wars going on, EVERYONE will get downrange every once in a while. In fact, the AF hasn't stopped flying combat sorties over Iraq since Desert Storm! My own experience with Mr. Sadam not-so-kindly asking me to leave his airspace (via a Surface to Air Missile) happened in 1999, when most of America wasn't even aware that we had military members actively engaged against him. But I digress. Today, most of our tactical forces fall in the Air Expeditionary Forces (AEF) cycle, which is 4 months downrange, 18 months back home, then another 4 months downrange. Rinse, repeat. With most of the tactical flyers staying with one unit for 2 1/2 - 3 years, this means they will most likely get to bad-guy land usually twice per tour.

This doesn't count the times away from home for temporary duty as part of your training. Exercises like Red Flag and Cope Thunder also take you away from home for a couple of weeks at a time, usually two or three times in the 18-month "home" period.

The same things go for our tactical heavy and support forces, but since there aren't as many of them, they end up deploying for the "real mission" more often, and are away from home more frequently. Our Strategic assets like the B-2 or the B-52 aren't deployed in the current conflict, but still do quite a bit of temporary deployments for training (however, they were HEAVILY involved in the initial, heavy combat ops of the two current wars).

Now, for our airlift guys, almost 90% of THIER flying is on their actual mission. A few training sorties typically here and there (especially the tactical air-drop types), but they get to walk out of the door everyday and say, "today's sortie, I'm actually doing something important". They get to know that if they do't fly that day, someone, somewhere will go without. I miss a sortie for a broken jet, oh well, less learning for me that day. They miss a sortie, PFC Johnny Grunt may not eat that night! A real motivator.

Typically, one third of the airlift squadron is off some WHERE, doing some THING. They are also part of the AEF cycles, but usually a third of the jets will go "downrange", performing duties in that area for that AEF. The next cyle, the next third goes, and so on.

Not sure if the forum tools will allow me to publish a "novel" in one shot. So, I'm going to break this up into a second post. Next up: the community, and a typical career...

[Bullet]

Second post, as promised:

The COMMUNITY:

What can I say? We 'uns fighter guys are the knuckle dragging Fraternity boys every Hollywood movie portrays us as. And the airlift guys? Well, we're just happy they don't accidently turn off the auto-pilot when they drop their spoons for their box lunchs....

All kidding aside (and trust me, there is some FRIENDLY kidding between the two communites, but more importantly, lots of comraderie and respect). Here's is how I see it.

The typical "fighter (or bomber) -pilot attitude? Agressive, and always wants to win. At EVERYTHING. You will never meet a bunch of people more hung-up on competition. We are always judging ourselves against the other folks in the squadron, and everyone wants to be Number one. We compete at EVERYTHING, from who has the best car, to who has the prettiest wife (I won that one), to who has the best bombs on the range that day. We need that competitive spirit because we know without it, it makes our chances of survival in combat just that much less.

But we also took the flying VERY seriously. We would analyze 15 seconds of gun camera film for an hour in the mission debriefs, trying to detemine why the bandit lived, why our wingman didn't, or why we didn't hit the target on the first pass. We literally have vaults full of manuals and book on the procedures we need to know cold when we fly, and we expect our new guys to be studying them constantly when they aren't on the schedule. Even us old heads would have to spend time keeping up with the reading. A typical fighter pilot has at least a Master's level of knowledge on the tactics and procedures. We also send our best and brightest to the Weapons School, 6 months of the most intensive flight training in the world, where they will learn to become the "instructors for our instructors". The will be getting the Doctorate level of learning, and they are the ones who set the standard throughout the AF and create the latest tactcs.

Those outside of the fighter community made fun of the way we seemed so "anally retentive" about the mission and debriefs. But IMO, they just didn't understand why we took it sooooo seriously.

ON the social side,it was very much like a Fraternity in atmosphere. Because we deployed as a unit, stayed at home as a unit, and went everywhere AS A UNIT, we all felt like we were part of a brotherhood. We played the silly games, had the wierd traditions, hung out in the squadron bar together, and let loose together (often to the amusement of our airlift brothers and other outsiders). Even our wives were expected to hang out together (but that has started to change). Silly? Yes, but these folk became my second family, and I would gladly give my life for them in battle...

On the airlift side, I was always under the impression that they were much more laid back in attitude than the fighter community. I am probably wrong, but again this was just my impression. For one, thier mission debriefs did not go into as much detail as ours. They just seemed to me to carry themselves in a much more relaxed attitude. Professional flyers still, just not so anal about it as the guys I hung with...

On the social side-- well, since a good portion of their squadron mates would constantly be gone on a daily basis, they just didn't seem to me to have as close a knit squadron back home. Since they all weren't around at the same time, they didn't have that luxury to bond as a unit like we did. However, get them downrange or the crews that were deployed together did have a good sense of comraderie.


The TYPICAL CAREER:

Fighter / bomber guy: show up at your first ops squadron. Learn the jet and the tactics off the bat as a wingman. After about 18 months to 2 years, upgrade to 2-ship flight lead (you and a wingman, together in battle, you leading him (or her) to victory). Hopefully get enough experience before you PCS in a year or less to become a 4-ship flgiht lead (the backbone of our combat ops). PCS, hopefully to another Ops flying assignment. Get the reputation of being a great 4-ship flight lead and upgrade to Instructor within a year. Become a great instructor and apply for Weapons School (for the F-15E, only 8 guys went to every six month class, so it was COMPETITIVE!). Spend another year or two afterwards as the head instructor and lead of your squadron's wepaons shop. PCS again, either to school or become an IP for the transition course (you teach new guys how to fly the plane). PCS again, take a staff job or other flying type of job. PCS again, and go back to compete for a squadron leadership position (first the Director of Ops (the squadron's #2), then squadron command).

There, that takes you all the way up to becoming ready to make full bird Colonel. Easy to do? Heck no! Chances of getting it? All depends on how good you really are, and how much the guys above you like you. Are there other paths to Colonel, outside of flying? Certainly.

Progession for the heavy guys? Well, you start out in the co-pilot's right seat for most platforms. Gain a bunch of experience (heavy guys usually have thousands of more flight hours than fighters, only because of sortie duration), and transition to the "Pilot-in-Command" left seat. PCS time frames remain the same.

However, I'm also under the impression that a lot more of the heavy guys transition to the Reserves and Guard once their Active commitments are up. More opportunities to do so, and I guess they like the idea of finally being able to stay home more often (don't deploy as much).

As to "after the military"? Well, despite the thought that the airlines would prefer to hire the heavy guys because of their hours in similar birds, I have it on reliable sources (freinds of mine involved in the airline pilot hiring process), that they prefer fighter guys. Why? Well, usually the fighter guys graduated UPT higher, so the impression is they are better pilots. Not always the case, I know, but it is an impression that needs to be addressed when you go looking for that job at SouthWest. Also, the airlines LIKE the attitude towards flying the fighter guys have, again the impression is that the fighter guys take it more seriously. (Again, take it up with the airlines if you don't like their bias). Lastly, it just worked out that most of the guys the airlines use to interview prospective pilots were ex-fighter guys. Keeping it in the family, so to speak. (Again, take it up with United, not me).

Wow! I think I'm developing carpal tunnel! I just want to leave you with this thought. I haven't even scratched the surface is comparing the two communities. So much to talk about, not enough space on the internet. You want more info, something specific perhaps? Go ahead, ask away....

And I'm spent.

[oldgrad]

Originally Posted by Bullet

The typical "fighter (or bomber) -pilot attitude? Agressive, and always wants to win. At EVERYTHING. You will never meet a bunch of people more hung-up on competition. We are always judging ourselves against the other folks in the squadron, and everyone wants to be Number one. We compete at EVERYTHING, from who has the best car, to who has the prettiest wife (I won that one), to who has the best bombs on the range that day. We need that competitive spirit because we know without it, it makes our chances of survival in combat just that much less.

But we also took the flying VERY seriously. We would analyze 15 seconds of gun camera film for an hour in the mission debriefs

Those outside of the fighter community made fun of the way we seemed so "anally retentive" about the mission and debriefs. But IMO, they just didn't understand why we took it sooooo seriously.

ON the social side,it was very much like a Fraternity in atmosphere. Because we deployed as a unit, stayed at home as a unit, and went everywhere AS A UNIT, we all felt like we were part of a brotherhood.

On the airlift side, I was always under the impression that they were much more laid back in attitude than the fighter community

They just seemed to me to carry themselves in a much more relaxed attitude. Professional flyers still, just not so anal about it as the guys I hung with...

On the social side-- well, since a good portion of their squadron mates would constantly be gone on a daily basis, they just didn't seem to me to have as close a knit squadron back home.

Originally Posted by Bullet

Bottom Line: I think we are in agreement in about 95% of the Big Picture here, and I don't want the other 5% to drag this thread off any further...

Thanks. Very pertinent. Very perceptive. After more blind curves than a West Virginia driveway, I think we are in 100% agreement with maybe the exclusion of the following statement:

Originally Posted by Bullet

I get the impression you believe personality traits are of much higher importance than the level I put it on, but we both believe it should be taken into consideration....

I don’t know how you could arrive at that conclusion based on my original statement (bold face added) but I will forgive your misconception:

Originally Posted by oldgrad

. Different personalities and motor skills, among many other variables, lend themselves to different communities.

Perhaps a knee jerk initial disagreement causing one to have to repeatedly defend a single portion of one’s position might cause a casual observer to think too much emphasis is being placed on that part.

You remember an old poster who was “here with a condescending, "holier-than-thou" attitude”. I remember a mom, wife of a service academy grad, with two children, one at AFA and one at USNA, whose very perceptive posts were discounted by those who had never “been there and done that” and was treated very similarly to me at the initial part of this thread. Perhaps the “holier than thou” accusation should be spread around a little more. As an aside, have you ever noticed the truth in the old adage that the faults of others that most bother someone are those faults that they themselves possess.

Back on topic. Probably a third of the first tour pilots in some communities become non-competitive. Some self-deselect because they don’t like to be away from home. Some do not have the motor skills to succeed. Some don’t fit with either the mission or their fellow fliers. All can contribute. On this forum, we cannot do anything about motor skills or the reality of being away from home. One can think they like to travel and go places but until they actually experience it, they don’t really know. However, we would be remiss if we did not make people aware of the attitudes (read personality traits) of those in each community to assist them in making the proper decision. And yes, some who don’t fit, succeed. But are they as happy as perhaps they would be in another community? For those who are there doing it, it may seem insignificant to have 15 seconds of ones life analyzed for an hour, but there are many perfectly good stick and rudder pilots out there who could not handle it. This is where I disagree with Christcorp, a loner would probably be more happy as a transport pilot.

Bullet, additionally, I have provided links to support myself throughout this thread. It is one thing to say one should be in the top 10% of their primary class to GUARANTEE that they get jets but entirely misleading to say that only the top 10% WILL get jets. That comment may actually drive a reader to the Navy, even though he doesn't think he will like shipboard life, just because he thinks his chance of jets is greater. I provided a responsible link which stated that 2 yrs ago, 30% of AF pilots were in the fighter community. Your rebuttal doesn't add up. Could you please verify and provide links? We owe it to the youngsters who read these threads.

[Pima]

Curiosity question.

Probably a third of the first tour pilots in some communities become non-competitive. Some self-deselect because they don’t like to be away from home. Some do not have the motor skills to succeed. Some don’t fit with either the mission or their fellow fliers.

I know you are saying some communities, but don't you think 1/3 is a high number? If a particular community is losing that many pilots, then there is a true issue within the community. This maybe true from the Navy, but I don't recall seeing 1/3 of the strike or the 111 guys leave unless it was time to fly a desk or medical dq. Bullet retired only a few months ago, and at his slide show he had a pic of his TX class. There were 16 guys, the joke was only 2 other people were left in the AF. Out of that class. Only 1 had left the Strike to go back to the A-10, and that was because he was selected for WING KING. All of the others never flew another aircraft, nor left the jet unless MPC said to, and that was 15 yrs of his 20, thus the majority of Bullet's career.

I know the numbers are higher when air frames get boneyarded and thus flyers will switch out, but Xtraining 1/3 or freely allowing them to walk after 3 yrs is not cost beneficial. Plus, to take a desk after you 1st tour means no gates have been met and you can kiss that flight pay goodbye. At one point in Bullets career we were concerned that he might have misssed his last gate by a month or two,(all because of PME in residence and Pentagon assignment) thus we would not have gotten flight pay after 22 yrs. When it tops out at 845 bucks a month that is a lot to walk away from.

I just can't see the AFMPC saying yep, you don't like the jet or the people in your squadron, so here's a desk. Never mind the fact that we spent millions of dollars training you...that's okay, we want you to be happy. Never knew of a guy who couldn't cut it being xtrained either...typically if they can't cut it they are FEB way before the EOT for your 1st operational duty. AF is funny that way, they don't like sending guys into a squadron that might cause a mishap. I remember in 89 when Bullet was at LIFT and there was a newspaper article in the local paper they called the guys the 6 milliondollar man, because that is how much it cost to train them. That is 20 yrs ago, I can't imagine the cost being less than 10 million now. You do not re-cooup that cost in one tour. The military isn't here to be you pal, its job is to guarantee the mission and C status of every airframe.

I can recall guys in Bullets squadrons, that were not liked and had no business being in the Strike, but there they were because MPC told them to you are going here to this base, this squadron no later than this date. The guys callsigns should tell you how proficient they were TUMOR and ZERO.
They could volunteer to go somewhere else like Korea freely for a remote, but they would than come back 1 yr later into the cockpit. Be honest who volunteers to go to Camp Red Cloud?

Maybe the Navy is different and it is easier to walk away from being a flier, or maybe more guys chose to, but every guy that Bullet went to UNT, FTU and XTU never walked away or asked to get out of the fighter comunity. One was asked to leave via FEB, but when you add in @30 guys total (16 in FTU and 16 different guys in XTU) that real life statistic illustrates for at least the111 and the 15E they stay. ANother compliment to the Strike is those WSOs that leave go to become pilots (typically 1 per yr per base will get the chance or 1 out of 200+) it is very common to see them 9 months later in the FTU, they chose to come back to the Strike. I know of only one that took the 16, but than again no strikes were offered in his class, so who knows maybe he would have selected the Strike too! He retired out of the 16.

[oldgrad]

Originally Posted by Pima

Curiosity question. Don't you think 1/3 is a high number? This maybe true from the Navy

Yes, I was specifically speaking of Navy fighter squadrons which is why I used the word "some" and also included my made up word,'self de-select'. However, think about the ratios of first to second to third tour pilots in any squadron. Those who don't come back for subsequent tours go somewhere, and it is probably not on the 'fast' track.

Hey, no fair changing your post after I post my response.

Adding to my post; Tongue firmly embedded in cheek swearing to myself not to dwell on how top heavy the AF is, in the Navy, every first tour aviator can look around the ready room at his sixteen or so compatriots and, since yeargroups pretty much are assigned jobs at the same point, realize that only two or maybe three of them will ever achieve CO/XO of that type squadron. Everyone else is on a secondary track. With these odds, it is the intangibles as well as the obvious that ensures success.

[Pima]

I agree that only a few statistically will ever become DO/CC or Wing King. I also agree some will become fast track burners, but that does not begin as an O-2, you typically will not see that occur until at least O-3, since the AF no longer has BPZ for O-4, you cannot be officially on that course for the 1st decade+ of your career. If you make O-5 2 BPZ you are still at the 15 yr point.

Bullet voluntarily stepped out or (de-selected) to go to the 82nd so he would not fly the 111 into the boneyard. He did this after the 1st tour, but had the strike not been coming on line and the 111, not been on the hitlist I don't know if he would have left it. He did 3 of his 4 operational tours flying the Strike....even after he completed his jt assignment he requested to go back. There at Seymour we ran into the exact same people who started off their career with him. Fliers will step out, some voluntarily, some not (hit list for remote), but they all try to return home to the nest. You must step out to get promoted, but it doesn't mean it is forever. Currently, you do not see a high number as 1/3 in the AF that willingly steps out after the 1st tour. I believe the 1st gate is at 8, stepping after 1st tour makes it near impossible to ever step back in, especially since you will need to attend an XT course. Why should they spend the money on you to retrain you if you willingly left? Only reason why, is because you voluntarily took a bad juju assignment (jumping out of perfectly good airplanes falls into that cat). You don't take that assignment unless you are getting something better...XTrain from Strike to 22. Otherwise, you ask to keep on flying and do not de-select, because to become that DO/CC later on, you want to be a patch wearer. To become a patch wearer you need to be the best in the Op world, win Top Gun every quarter, work in the Weapons shop and that does not happen as an O-2 it does when you are an O-3. You go there or Test, than you immediately go on to your next assignment flying with the lessons leaarned, become Weapons Shop Chief or Wing Weapons, now you are an O-4 you get PME in residence, do a desk, come back in as the O-5 select guy already targeted to take over as DO of a squadron. Do a DO, than a CC, get picked up 3 yrs later as BPZ for O-6, go to PME in residence, come back as Vice or DOG. As you can see they fly out to make ther gates. After O-6 all bets are off and most likely you will not see the inside of an Aircraft again.

Actually in the AF Strike they are not top heavy, because if they were they wouldn't have sent a message to those recent retirees to think about stepping back in since they need their experience.

The AF might be top heavy in ratio of Fighter pilots making O-6+ compared to everyone else, however look at it from a rational scenario. These guys/gals proved themselves 20 yrs earlier by graduating at the top of UPT/UNT. Then most if not all went onto WIC/Test,(again top of the top, b/c they also take heavies) from there they were BPZ and took a fighter squadron to the sandbox (again the AF never left and like Bullet said he was shot at in 99).
So even if the heavy guy/gal was on the same track, when we put the 2 side by side, the fighter most likely graduated 20 yrs earlier at a higher level than the heavy. That is also why many non-flyers want the promotion board changed from Line to rated, b/c rated are promoted at a higer % than non-rated. You can always take the pilot out nad make him Maintenance Commander, but the Maintenance commander can't become a flyer.

The AF is like the Navy it is dictated the % of Flag to Field and Field to Company. That is why you have to wait for your line number. You can't get promoted to Field if they don't retire fast enough. (Also why SERBs exist) You can only have a certain % and that is it. If you reduce the numbers of company grade, than Field grade must reduce (look back @97/98) the promotion rate to Major was low due to the fact that the company grade had been reduced in yrs prior, so they had to keep it in line. Than look at it in the past sev. yrs and not only was O-4 a higher %, but they sped up the boards, because the AF commissioned more in the late 90's early 00/01.
So thus, the AF can be no more top heavy than the Navy, it is dictated by the congress.

[13ryan13]

This may be a stupid quesiton, but I honestly do not know the answer, so I'm hoping one of you experienced AF members can shed some light: How long does it take a person fresh out of UPT to actually get "behind the wheel" of an F-22, or any Air Force airplane in general? I dare to dream that I will be in the top 10% of my UPT class and will get selected to fly the F-22. Supposing that happens, would I have to be a certain rank to fly an F-22? Surely they don't let 2nd lieuts fly the most expensive fighter ever....

And I ask because I am strongly leaning towards this option... although the travelling opportunities for cargo are very tempting. And bombers are just BA. Wow, this is going to be a hard decision. (hoping I get to even make that decision lol)